From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_MUTT autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 10F74C43218 for ; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 15:42:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FA172088F for ; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 15:42:01 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=default; t=1556206921; bh=D2Iuvsrp3bx79rGa/wq+w7GHIBzLICFaDzZw9rIKylI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:List-ID:From; b=WtOCoVE/K1o5hUS11xOBslmnRkBhrV6RgjU3c+6NBpXpktJyxB10hMo4i0m5uPhiB hWIrk3WKSVT0v0hMDyhKRNquSxNSxdGwZ0KNljWDuc2/bgu3eaiLDKmjNtQRcXDwmp +055BEYlOz7TeOqRbNoUAIeJKTXCWBUZOl1BJldE= Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727821AbfDYPl7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Apr 2019 11:41:59 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:45256 "EHLO mx1.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726296AbfDYPl7 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Apr 2019 11:41:59 -0400 X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at test-mx.suse.de Received: from relay2.suse.de (unknown [195.135.220.254]) by mx1.suse.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7F89AFED; Thu, 25 Apr 2019 15:41:57 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2019 17:41:56 +0200 From: Michal Hocko To: Will Deacon Cc: Pavel Tatashin , jmorris@namei.org, sashal@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org, linux-nvdimm@lists.01.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com, keith.busch@intel.com, vishal.l.verma@intel.com, dave.jiang@intel.com, zwisler@kernel.org, thomas.lendacky@amd.com, ying.huang@intel.com, fengguang.wu@intel.com, bp@suse.de, bhelgaas@google.com, baiyaowei@cmss.chinamobile.com, tiwai@suse.de, jglisse@redhat.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, rppt@linux.vnet.ibm.com, ard.biesheuvel@linaro.org, andrew.murray@arm.com, james.morse@arm.com, marc.zyngier@arm.com, sboyd@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: configurable sparsemem section size Message-ID: <20190425154156.GZ12751@dhcp22.suse.cz> References: <20190423203843.2898-1-pasha.tatashin@soleen.com> <20190425152550.GY12751@dhcp22.suse.cz> <20190425153138.GC25193@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20190425153138.GC25193@fuggles.cambridge.arm.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu 25-04-19 16:31:38, Will Deacon wrote: > On Thu, Apr 25, 2019 at 05:25:50PM +0200, Michal Hocko wrote: > > On Tue 23-04-19 16:38:43, Pavel Tatashin wrote: > > > sparsemem section size determines the maximum size and alignment that > > > is allowed to offline/online memory block. The bigger the size the less > > > the clutter in /sys/devices/system/memory/*. On the other hand, however, > > > there is less flexability in what granules of memory can be added and > > > removed. > > > > > > Recently, it was enabled in Linux to hotadd persistent memory that > > > can be either real NV device, or reserved from regular System RAM > > > and has identity of devdax. > > > > > > The problem is that because ARM64's section size is 1G, and devdax must > > > have 2M label section, the first 1G is always missed when device is > > > attached, because it is not 1G aligned. > > > > > > Allow, better flexibility by making section size configurable. > > > > Is there any inherent reason (64k page size?) that enforces such a large > > memsection? > > I gave *vague* memories of running out of bits in the page flags if we > changed this, but that was a while back. If that's no longer the case, > then I'm open to changing the value, but I really don't want to expose > it as a Kconfig option as proposed in this patch. People won't have a > clue what to set and it doesn't help at all with the single-Image effort. Ohh, I absolutely agree about the config option part JFTR. 1GB section loos quite excessive. I am not really sure a standard arm64 memory layout looks though. -- Michal Hocko SUSE Labs